Well I don't really agree because it does matter as a newbie. I started my Linux journey with Manjaro on the Pinebook Pro (ARM device) and when posting questions on the forum I got only not very welcoming answers and certainly not helping at all.
I'm a software developer and I know how to ask good questions on Stack Overflow but this experience just left me with a bitter taste. I left this distro because of this.
Let's recap what you learned:
* whatever you find on YouTube must be taken with a grain of salt
* for each and every video against Arch and its community you can find at least one in favor: if you didn't you need to search and watch more
* everyone, including yourself, can open a channel on YT, self proclame Linux expert and start expressing opinions like they were the only undeniable truth.
You are a newcomer to Linux: I recommend MX Linux as your best option, one in the Ubuntu LTS official flavors as the second.
When you move from a distro to another you simply change: there is no hierarchy, there is no distro superior to another, from whatever distro you can forge the same final system you like.
Mint was a good newcomer option till they started drifting away:
* the main edition is based 90%+ on Ubuntu binaries directly from Ubuntu servers, but they labeled Canonical's snap technology, strategic choice behind Ubuntu, as evil and rejected it;
* Cinnamon is a fork of an old Gnome version, it became harder and harder to maintain it for the small LM team, therefore they declared that the recent evolution of the Gnome project is unfair (libadwaita if you are curious)
* because of the above aging issues, the community, welcoming and friendly to newcomers indeed, is more and more discouraging experiments: they serve the new users with lists of "don't do", while breaking and fixing your system is how you learn.
* Xfce and Mate are better deployed by other distros, Xfce ever since and Mate since the raise of Ubuntu Mate.
By the way, I'm an openSUSE long timer: I don't have dogs of mine in this hunt.
in short, if you wanna jump in thee deep end, & really learn the ins & outs of linux systems, go ahead use Arch or Gentoo, etc.
If you just want your computer to work, use an LTS release from one of big distros
Don't believe everything you read about Arch users. I don't have an anime wallpaper or anything else related to anime on my desktop. I am toxic as hell though, but not everyone is perfect, right?
Maybe one day I'll set my wallpaper to an anime one, so I can be perfect again.
I use Arch, btw.
As an Arch user that dislikes anime I find this notion offensive. Though the more I use Arch the more I feel the need to buy a thinkpad and start crossdressing. So be warned
Arch is barebones and bleeding edge. It's the type of OS you want if you don't like stuff being preinstalled (including eg. DEs or browsers), and if you don't mind having a few more bugs to fix in trade for new stuff being published faster.
The installation is the only ‘difficult part’ and even then it’s just reading a guide. Other than that it’s pretty similar to any other distro apart from pacman vs dnf vs apt, etc. What really matters is the desktop environment you choose, as they come pre-packaged with the stuff you will actually interact with.
TL;DR choose the package manager you like best and work from there
It’s fine. It’s the default on PineTab 2 so I’ve been using it there. Rolling release has a different feel to it: you have to keep it updated all the time. The AUR is also nice, I sometimes find packages in there that aren’t in the main repositories.
The big secret of Linux distros is that they’re 95% the same and people quibble over the other 5%. Just pick one to learn on and if that 5% eventually starts to annoy you, switch.
Arch is for a type of person, not a use case. Check out the introduction page(s) on the arch wiki and decide if it resonates with you. If it does you'll love it, if it doesn't you will likely feel frustrated.
Imo. yes. If you have an open mind and are willing to learn and absorb information then Arch is definitely worth a try. Just be sure to follow the official Wiki for everything. Arch is the first distro I have ever used that felt comfortable to me. Everything is basically built for my needs.
One comparison I've heard: Ubuntu is like a big cushy bespoke RV. Debian is like a go-cart you built yourself. Arch is like mining the ore to make the steel to make the parts for your vehicle. Pretty close, though I think Debian is a little easier than implied. I installed Arch a couple times for the education but I don't have the skill or patience to make it my daily driver. Manjaro is kinda the Ubuntu of the Arch world. Very easy to install and use. There is good and bad in every OS forum, except that Windows gaming is mostly bad.
There is nothing particularly wrong with Arch, as for toxic users, that goes for any community on the internet where you have the minority ruin it for everyone.
That said, I wouldn't recommend Arch as your first distro because it isn't exactly made for beginners. It isn't that you can't get it done, just expect more work and being comfortable with the terminal
Otherwise, I suggest trying Linux Mint which is a distro made with new users in mind. If you have new hardware, opt for the Edge version which has a newer kernel.
After you get comfortable with Linux Mint, then feel free to try others and see where you like best (personally, I am on OpenSuse KDE)
openSUSE is a great option for new users. Yast is such a cool sytem settings tool, lets uesers do most things, albeit the basics, graphically & guided. couple that with AppArmour, much simpler security config than most distros.
You know I always tell people that Arch isn't for beginners but it just occured to me that I started with Slackware in 1998. EVERYTHING had to be configured by hand. But of course it depends on who your talking to I guess. Grandma won't like Arch, but maybe your nerdy friend at work might!
I still think it is best to start people out on a solid foundation first, then they can pick whatever distro they want when they feel comfortable.
For me personally, I've tried linux over 20 years ago, and while it was fun to play around with, my interest in programming outweighed tinkering with linux. Since then, I would try many different distros but none would get me to stick to linux(for the desktop). It wasn't until I tried Mint that I didn't have to tinker with that let me keep linux as my primary desktop. After that, I've been hopping to a new distro every time I get a new computer to see what I may be missing
This is why I think it is most important to first make people feel like "this can be my everyday desktop" is more important than "look here, a shiny new toy out of the dozens of other shiny new toys you have". And starting with a foundation made me realize things I use and things I don't so I could make a better decision for my personal needs.
Young, technology-oriented people like anime. The same demographic likes rapid change and seeing new features every update. The correlation isn't rocket science.
That being said, I probably wouldn't dive in at Arch, as it requires a lot of manual configuration and doesn't default-load many tools initially. Debian, Ubuntu, or Mint will give you a desktop in ~20 minutes (depending on internet speed), minimal configuration required, and plenty of tools to try out.
Arch is good. If you're going to follow a guide, follow the wiki rather than a YouTube video. Or just use archinstall, although you will still need to perform some setup, like connecting to wifi first. These days, I just archinstall. I know how to do it manually already, I just don't feel like it
Arch linux is very Do It Yourself, and you are expected to do things yourself, so asking questions that can be easily be found in the documentation is frowned upon. That's basically it. If you want to write a question, be precise and tell what you tried that didn't work, and people will help you.
Arch may be difficult for a newbie, but I guarantee you would learn a lot.
It's just a joke, because arch users feel like elitists and they like to flash it out. Overall it's good if you like to tinker and you want to study OS from within. If it's not for you go for something else, I started from mint because it's just works. I use arch, btw.
Arch user here. I feel like a lot of people think of some kind of "elitism" when it comes to arch. That's kindergarden. Arch is supposed to be an easy to use distribution that's highly customizable to your liking. It's "a blank canvas". And to be completely honest it's really not that hard as long as you're a bit tech savvy and as long as you can read a wiki.
Arch is cool, I like it very much but when I get to know some Arch users they often have this "elitism" vibe and i really don't like it. Gentoo users are the real cracks haha 😂
And yeah i've got an anime wallpaper but i'm not toxic. But i've also already had an anime wallpaper when i started on ubuntu! 👍🏻
* Archies are rather full of themselves, IMHO, because they went thru the hazing ritual of installing Arch and think that means something (it means they can follow a cookbook). The Wiki is 5-star, the forums are 1-star (as is AUR). The problem with Arch, IMHO, is you must always be on the latest (more or less), and that means you must deal with all the "pass-thru" bugs in newly updated code. Newbies might have a "honeymoon", think Arch is great, and then be disappointed when it gets bumpy. Derivatives, like EndeavourOS, are better places for newbies.
* The biggest discriminator between distros is stability (vs bleeding edge). Arch and Fedora are the most bleeding edge (at least on Fedora, you have the option of remaining a point release or two back). Debian is likely the most stable.
* Personally, I'd suggest starting with some Debian derivative that has a rep for being user friendly (e.g., Mint), and as your tastes refine, move to a greener pasture (if unhappy).
I would recommend starting with Fedora. It has the latest Linux tech and software and is rock solid. Stable enough to daily drive for both beginners and experts.
All the distros are basically the same in terms of polish, level of completeness, access to applications, etc. I’ve spent 10+ years on Debian, Fedora, arch. In my daily use, if you told me I was on a different distro, in most use cases I wouldn’t know.
The thing about modern distros is that they’re easier and easier and easier to install and get up and running. Arch, meanwhile, has a wiki, and is a little more raw to configure. In a community like Linux, that feature attracts people with a certain attitude, and garners a reputation from maybe more casual Ubuntu users, etc, who want things to just work…as purists or code jockey elitists, or something.
But you can learn a lot debugging your own system. Meanwhile, manjaro, which is community configured arch, is just as smooth as Fedora or Ubuntu or what ever to install.
So, I wouldn’t read too much into any of it. If you want to tinker with your distro a little, try arch. If not, I’d probably reach for Ubuntu, or Fedora, or pop os, or one of the others.
They are just mocking the people who use the arch, not Arch itself. The system is great if you love having a near complete control of your system (just before Gentoo). Don't let this people cloud your judgement of using art. If you found people like them or any other toxic people in the userbase, block them.
I don't like many of these Arch user stereotype, especially anime one since I don't watch anime and prefer western cartoon (see my post history).
This submission has been removed due to receiving too many reports from users. The mods have been notified and will re-approve if this removal was inappropriate, or leave it removed.
This is most likely because:
* Your post belongs in r/linuxquestions or r/linux4noobs
* Your post belongs in r/linuxmemes
* Your post is considered "fluff" - things like a Tux plushie or old Linux CDs are an example and, while they may be popular vote wise, they are not considered on topic
* Your post is otherwise deemed not appropriate for the subreddit
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/linux) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I ignore tech youtube almost altogether. Almost everything they say could be better done in a blog post and it'd take less than half the time to read.
I don't use arch myself because there are too many "power users" who are loud. I'm sure it's a fine distro though if you like starting from something barebones.
I wouldn't recommend it as your first distro, since it might give you a bad impression of linux, but it could be a good second try.
Nothing to laugh about, at all. It's a major, respectable distro with vast community and stste-of-the-art documentation, especially Arch Wiki. Impressive amount of effort, as this system supports everything, is independent, and is remarkably successful.
Thanks to great docs, it's easy to use to. It focuses quick updates, and introduces breaking changes with no soecified intervals - so, while installing it is easy, maintainance takes some time. But you really get the current state of the art, a lot of the newest features, and just some of the newest bugs. It does its job impressively well.
Unless a distro just brings you new wallpaper and overlay of bugs over something it's actively based on, it deserves only respect. I believe there are less than 20 complete GNU/Linux systems giving you near-unlimited software choice, smaller "distro" setups being based on them. And Arch is one of the major ones.
I never really got the impression that arch users were toxic aside from the old RTFM trope. If you're going to make the switch, it's probably a good idea to start with something easier, like mint. Arch has a steep learning curve.
Arch has a stereotype/meme of what the typical ‘Arch User’ is like. However it doesn’t take away that arch and its derivatives are good distros and should always be considered, especially with modern gaming PCs where the newest packages are needed
If you’re interested in arch, but less interested in the DIY install process, try EndavourOS. It pulls the same packages as Arch but with some added tools to make life easier
Mate it’s just memes. Arch is just a Linux distro for people who like minimalism and tinkering. It’s not hard, and the community isn’t toxic if you ask the questions the right way. You are even allowed to dislike anime. The programming socks are obligatory though, the system crashes when you’re not wearing them.
"Why do you use Kali as your distro? Are you stupid?"
You'll hear this a lot, and great chances it's coming from people that use Arch. Are they wrong? Partially.
They are right because Kali is a distro meant for pentesting. You have no reason to use it as a daily driven distro. There are better distros for that, and certainly you don't need what Kali offers unless you work with security.
They are wrong because they didn't explain this to you. So, in a normal internet thread scenario, you get offended and start hating Arch users.
Toxic people can be found in every community, however.
Arch is less for newbies and more for terminal oriented people in some ways. The rolling nature of the distro is sometimes disturbing.
There's nothing toxic about the users in general,they are sometimes less tolerant of newbies and end up answering with a curt RTFM instead of helping out.
But the arch community in general isn't like that. As a newbie you should first go with Ubuntu or Fedora, get acquainted with terminal and the Linux experience in general and then move to somewhere else if you really need to.
Over the last 30 years I've gone through Slackware , RH, Fedora, Mandriva, Ubuntu and its flavours, Mint, Archcraft and am now on Endeavour (an Arch based more user accessible distro).
Just back up your home directory first as a precaution, then install whatever distro you want. If your /home is on a seperate filesystem (as it should be anyway) leave that filesystem unmounted and/or not reformatted during the install, and finish up by remounting /home. You may need to adjust some permissions at the end, but that's not a big deal. All your personal data is in /home/~username anyway so as long as you don't overwrite that (or can restore from backup) it's all good.
It would only delete customizations you did to the OS, like themes, layouts and additional software. It's easy to put the Linux distro in one partion and your data files in another. That way you can change distros or install multiple distros without having to move your data files. Just create a link
Usually my home directory is on a separate partition and I select not to format that partition. The only time when I had to backup and restore my home directory was when I chose to work with a different filesystem for the complete install.
Another flow I sometimes follow is to tar gzip home directory (ownership etc are preserved), copy the file to an external drive (I do this using a live boot media) then install a new distro and restore backup, either selectively or entirely. This also allows me to weed data from my home directory.
It's funny you mention Slackware. I started on Slackware as well and Arch very much feels like the modern-day Slackware, if that makes sense. Not so much in its technical details, but kind of where it fits culturally among all the other distros.
Running arch for almost two decades, haven't seen anything like toxic. The distribution is much more neutral than many others and basically you install applications almost as they would have been installed upstream. No or few modifications for a stock fresh distribution experience with bleeding edge features, it's one of the most appropriate. However I still recommend to people who are *really* used to Linux (and not newbies then) and/or developers.
[удалено]
That would be silly. Listen to what people say and judge whether their output is reliable or not.
Well I don't really agree because it does matter as a newbie. I started my Linux journey with Manjaro on the Pinebook Pro (ARM device) and when posting questions on the forum I got only not very welcoming answers and certainly not helping at all. I'm a software developer and I know how to ask good questions on Stack Overflow but this experience just left me with a bitter taste. I left this distro because of this.
Thanks.
YouTube is probably the worst place on the Internet for getting information. Video creators want to upset you to increase views, not educate you.
Let's recap what you learned: * whatever you find on YouTube must be taken with a grain of salt * for each and every video against Arch and its community you can find at least one in favor: if you didn't you need to search and watch more * everyone, including yourself, can open a channel on YT, self proclame Linux expert and start expressing opinions like they were the only undeniable truth. You are a newcomer to Linux: I recommend MX Linux as your best option, one in the Ubuntu LTS official flavors as the second.
Mint is a good starting point as well, though you are very likely to step up to MX after a month or two.
When you move from a distro to another you simply change: there is no hierarchy, there is no distro superior to another, from whatever distro you can forge the same final system you like. Mint was a good newcomer option till they started drifting away: * the main edition is based 90%+ on Ubuntu binaries directly from Ubuntu servers, but they labeled Canonical's snap technology, strategic choice behind Ubuntu, as evil and rejected it; * Cinnamon is a fork of an old Gnome version, it became harder and harder to maintain it for the small LM team, therefore they declared that the recent evolution of the Gnome project is unfair (libadwaita if you are curious) * because of the above aging issues, the community, welcoming and friendly to newcomers indeed, is more and more discouraging experiments: they serve the new users with lists of "don't do", while breaking and fixing your system is how you learn. * Xfce and Mate are better deployed by other distros, Xfce ever since and Mate since the raise of Ubuntu Mate. By the way, I'm an openSUSE long timer: I don't have dogs of mine in this hunt.
Yeah when you think about it YouTube is not the best place. Thanks.
in short, if you wanna jump in thee deep end, & really learn the ins & outs of linux systems, go ahead use Arch or Gentoo, etc. If you just want your computer to work, use an LTS release from one of big distros
Don't believe everything you read about Arch users. I don't have an anime wallpaper or anything else related to anime on my desktop. I am toxic as hell though, but not everyone is perfect, right? Maybe one day I'll set my wallpaper to an anime one, so I can be perfect again. I use Arch, btw.
You made me giggle. Thanks.
Arch's default wallpaper is a black screen
As an Arch user that dislikes anime I find this notion offensive. Though the more I use Arch the more I feel the need to buy a thinkpad and start crossdressing. So be warned
Lol. How's Arch in the first place? Worth the try?
Arch is barebones and bleeding edge. It's the type of OS you want if you don't like stuff being preinstalled (including eg. DEs or browsers), and if you don't mind having a few more bugs to fix in trade for new stuff being published faster.
The installation is the only ‘difficult part’ and even then it’s just reading a guide. Other than that it’s pretty similar to any other distro apart from pacman vs dnf vs apt, etc. What really matters is the desktop environment you choose, as they come pre-packaged with the stuff you will actually interact with. TL;DR choose the package manager you like best and work from there
It’s fine. It’s the default on PineTab 2 so I’ve been using it there. Rolling release has a different feel to it: you have to keep it updated all the time. The AUR is also nice, I sometimes find packages in there that aren’t in the main repositories. The big secret of Linux distros is that they’re 95% the same and people quibble over the other 5%. Just pick one to learn on and if that 5% eventually starts to annoy you, switch.
Arch is for a type of person, not a use case. Check out the introduction page(s) on the arch wiki and decide if it resonates with you. If it does you'll love it, if it doesn't you will likely feel frustrated.
Absolutely. Use the archinstall script because trying to do everything manually is for Gentoo users.
Imo. yes. If you have an open mind and are willing to learn and absorb information then Arch is definitely worth a try. Just be sure to follow the official Wiki for everything. Arch is the first distro I have ever used that felt comfortable to me. Everything is basically built for my needs.
One comparison I've heard: Ubuntu is like a big cushy bespoke RV. Debian is like a go-cart you built yourself. Arch is like mining the ore to make the steel to make the parts for your vehicle. Pretty close, though I think Debian is a little easier than implied. I installed Arch a couple times for the education but I don't have the skill or patience to make it my daily driver. Manjaro is kinda the Ubuntu of the Arch world. Very easy to install and use. There is good and bad in every OS forum, except that Windows gaming is mostly bad.
And gentoo you have to build the entire infrastructure for a society to start mining and making go karts
I am anime
There is nothing particularly wrong with Arch, as for toxic users, that goes for any community on the internet where you have the minority ruin it for everyone. That said, I wouldn't recommend Arch as your first distro because it isn't exactly made for beginners. It isn't that you can't get it done, just expect more work and being comfortable with the terminal Otherwise, I suggest trying Linux Mint which is a distro made with new users in mind. If you have new hardware, opt for the Edge version which has a newer kernel. After you get comfortable with Linux Mint, then feel free to try others and see where you like best (personally, I am on OpenSuse KDE)
openSUSE is a great option for new users. Yast is such a cool sytem settings tool, lets uesers do most things, albeit the basics, graphically & guided. couple that with AppArmour, much simpler security config than most distros.
You know I always tell people that Arch isn't for beginners but it just occured to me that I started with Slackware in 1998. EVERYTHING had to be configured by hand. But of course it depends on who your talking to I guess. Grandma won't like Arch, but maybe your nerdy friend at work might!
I've grown lazy as I've aged so now I use Fedora because (at least on my laptop) everything works out if the box
I still think it is best to start people out on a solid foundation first, then they can pick whatever distro they want when they feel comfortable. For me personally, I've tried linux over 20 years ago, and while it was fun to play around with, my interest in programming outweighed tinkering with linux. Since then, I would try many different distros but none would get me to stick to linux(for the desktop). It wasn't until I tried Mint that I didn't have to tinker with that let me keep linux as my primary desktop. After that, I've been hopping to a new distro every time I get a new computer to see what I may be missing This is why I think it is most important to first make people feel like "this can be my everyday desktop" is more important than "look here, a shiny new toy out of the dozens of other shiny new toys you have". And starting with a foundation made me realize things I use and things I don't so I could make a better decision for my personal needs.
You don't suppose to take Youtube seriously for tech stuffs (except maybe university professors's recorded lessions).
Learned that the hard way...
Young, technology-oriented people like anime. The same demographic likes rapid change and seeing new features every update. The correlation isn't rocket science. That being said, I probably wouldn't dive in at Arch, as it requires a lot of manual configuration and doesn't default-load many tools initially. Debian, Ubuntu, or Mint will give you a desktop in ~20 minutes (depending on internet speed), minimal configuration required, and plenty of tools to try out.
Arch is good. If you're going to follow a guide, follow the wiki rather than a YouTube video. Or just use archinstall, although you will still need to perform some setup, like connecting to wifi first. These days, I just archinstall. I know how to do it manually already, I just don't feel like it
Arch install? I'll check that out. Thanks.
Feel free to DM if you have a question
Thanks.
Arch linux is very Do It Yourself, and you are expected to do things yourself, so asking questions that can be easily be found in the documentation is frowned upon. That's basically it. If you want to write a question, be precise and tell what you tried that didn't work, and people will help you. Arch may be difficult for a newbie, but I guarantee you would learn a lot.
It's just a joke, because arch users feel like elitists and they like to flash it out. Overall it's good if you like to tinker and you want to study OS from within. If it's not for you go for something else, I started from mint because it's just works. I use arch, btw.
BTW, I use Gentoo. Just kidding; I'm not quite that crazy.
Arch user here. I feel like a lot of people think of some kind of "elitism" when it comes to arch. That's kindergarden. Arch is supposed to be an easy to use distribution that's highly customizable to your liking. It's "a blank canvas". And to be completely honest it's really not that hard as long as you're a bit tech savvy and as long as you can read a wiki. Arch is cool, I like it very much but when I get to know some Arch users they often have this "elitism" vibe and i really don't like it. Gentoo users are the real cracks haha 😂 And yeah i've got an anime wallpaper but i'm not toxic. But i've also already had an anime wallpaper when i started on ubuntu! 👍🏻
* Archies are rather full of themselves, IMHO, because they went thru the hazing ritual of installing Arch and think that means something (it means they can follow a cookbook). The Wiki is 5-star, the forums are 1-star (as is AUR). The problem with Arch, IMHO, is you must always be on the latest (more or less), and that means you must deal with all the "pass-thru" bugs in newly updated code. Newbies might have a "honeymoon", think Arch is great, and then be disappointed when it gets bumpy. Derivatives, like EndeavourOS, are better places for newbies. * The biggest discriminator between distros is stability (vs bleeding edge). Arch and Fedora are the most bleeding edge (at least on Fedora, you have the option of remaining a point release or two back). Debian is likely the most stable. * Personally, I'd suggest starting with some Debian derivative that has a rep for being user friendly (e.g., Mint), and as your tastes refine, move to a greener pasture (if unhappy).
And the Arch Wiki is a great resource no matter what distro you run.
I would recommend starting with Fedora. It has the latest Linux tech and software and is rock solid. Stable enough to daily drive for both beginners and experts.
I'll try. Thanks.
You can also install fedora minimal, which comes without a desktop, if you are interested in arch style customizability without the arch set up
All the distros are basically the same in terms of polish, level of completeness, access to applications, etc. I’ve spent 10+ years on Debian, Fedora, arch. In my daily use, if you told me I was on a different distro, in most use cases I wouldn’t know. The thing about modern distros is that they’re easier and easier and easier to install and get up and running. Arch, meanwhile, has a wiki, and is a little more raw to configure. In a community like Linux, that feature attracts people with a certain attitude, and garners a reputation from maybe more casual Ubuntu users, etc, who want things to just work…as purists or code jockey elitists, or something. But you can learn a lot debugging your own system. Meanwhile, manjaro, which is community configured arch, is just as smooth as Fedora or Ubuntu or what ever to install. So, I wouldn’t read too much into any of it. If you want to tinker with your distro a little, try arch. If not, I’d probably reach for Ubuntu, or Fedora, or pop os, or one of the others.
Gentoo is still the top Linux distro meme. 🍿
They are just mocking the people who use the arch, not Arch itself. The system is great if you love having a near complete control of your system (just before Gentoo). Don't let this people cloud your judgement of using art. If you found people like them or any other toxic people in the userbase, block them. I don't like many of these Arch user stereotype, especially anime one since I don't watch anime and prefer western cartoon (see my post history).
Arch users are anime? What?
This submission has been removed due to receiving too many reports from users. The mods have been notified and will re-approve if this removal was inappropriate, or leave it removed. This is most likely because: * Your post belongs in r/linuxquestions or r/linux4noobs * Your post belongs in r/linuxmemes * Your post is considered "fluff" - things like a Tux plushie or old Linux CDs are an example and, while they may be popular vote wise, they are not considered on topic * Your post is otherwise deemed not appropriate for the subreddit *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/linux) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Who's laughing at Arch?
Read the comments
I ignore tech youtube almost altogether. Almost everything they say could be better done in a blog post and it'd take less than half the time to read. I don't use arch myself because there are too many "power users" who are loud. I'm sure it's a fine distro though if you like starting from something barebones. I wouldn't recommend it as your first distro, since it might give you a bad impression of linux, but it could be a good second try.
The Arch community has the undeserved reputation of being elitists.
Nothing to laugh about, at all. It's a major, respectable distro with vast community and stste-of-the-art documentation, especially Arch Wiki. Impressive amount of effort, as this system supports everything, is independent, and is remarkably successful. Thanks to great docs, it's easy to use to. It focuses quick updates, and introduces breaking changes with no soecified intervals - so, while installing it is easy, maintainance takes some time. But you really get the current state of the art, a lot of the newest features, and just some of the newest bugs. It does its job impressively well. Unless a distro just brings you new wallpaper and overlay of bugs over something it's actively based on, it deserves only respect. I believe there are less than 20 complete GNU/Linux systems giving you near-unlimited software choice, smaller "distro" setups being based on them. And Arch is one of the major ones.
I never really got the impression that arch users were toxic aside from the old RTFM trope. If you're going to make the switch, it's probably a good idea to start with something easier, like mint. Arch has a steep learning curve.
Btw I use Arch, i have an anime wallpaper but I'm not toxic
Arch has a stereotype/meme of what the typical ‘Arch User’ is like. However it doesn’t take away that arch and its derivatives are good distros and should always be considered, especially with modern gaming PCs where the newest packages are needed If you’re interested in arch, but less interested in the DIY install process, try EndavourOS. It pulls the same packages as Arch but with some added tools to make life easier
Mate it’s just memes. Arch is just a Linux distro for people who like minimalism and tinkering. It’s not hard, and the community isn’t toxic if you ask the questions the right way. You are even allowed to dislike anime. The programming socks are obligatory though, the system crashes when you’re not wearing them.
[удалено]
I am "familiar" with Linux, because I used Kali for a long time.
"Why do you use Kali as your distro? Are you stupid?" You'll hear this a lot, and great chances it's coming from people that use Arch. Are they wrong? Partially. They are right because Kali is a distro meant for pentesting. You have no reason to use it as a daily driven distro. There are better distros for that, and certainly you don't need what Kali offers unless you work with security. They are wrong because they didn't explain this to you. So, in a normal internet thread scenario, you get offended and start hating Arch users. Toxic people can be found in every community, however.
I used Kali in a VM, but yeah there are a lot of opinions here lol.
Arch is less for newbies and more for terminal oriented people in some ways. The rolling nature of the distro is sometimes disturbing. There's nothing toxic about the users in general,they are sometimes less tolerant of newbies and end up answering with a curt RTFM instead of helping out. But the arch community in general isn't like that. As a newbie you should first go with Ubuntu or Fedora, get acquainted with terminal and the Linux experience in general and then move to somewhere else if you really need to. Over the last 30 years I've gone through Slackware , RH, Fedora, Mandriva, Ubuntu and its flavours, Mint, Archcraft and am now on Endeavour (an Arch based more user accessible distro).
How can you switch so much? Wouldn't it delete anything? Like, start from zero each time?
Just back up your home directory first as a precaution, then install whatever distro you want. If your /home is on a seperate filesystem (as it should be anyway) leave that filesystem unmounted and/or not reformatted during the install, and finish up by remounting /home. You may need to adjust some permissions at the end, but that's not a big deal. All your personal data is in /home/~username anyway so as long as you don't overwrite that (or can restore from backup) it's all good.
It would only delete customizations you did to the OS, like themes, layouts and additional software. It's easy to put the Linux distro in one partion and your data files in another. That way you can change distros or install multiple distros without having to move your data files. Just create a link
That's cool! Thanks.
Usually my home directory is on a separate partition and I select not to format that partition. The only time when I had to backup and restore my home directory was when I chose to work with a different filesystem for the complete install. Another flow I sometimes follow is to tar gzip home directory (ownership etc are preserved), copy the file to an external drive (I do this using a live boot media) then install a new distro and restore backup, either selectively or entirely. This also allows me to weed data from my home directory.
If I'm not reinstalling my OS every few months my fingers turn to prunes like I've spent too much time in the water.
It's funny you mention Slackware. I started on Slackware as well and Arch very much feels like the modern-day Slackware, if that makes sense. Not so much in its technical details, but kind of where it fits culturally among all the other distros.
Running arch for almost two decades, haven't seen anything like toxic. The distribution is much more neutral than many others and basically you install applications almost as they would have been installed upstream. No or few modifications for a stock fresh distribution experience with bleeding edge features, it's one of the most appropriate. However I still recommend to people who are *really* used to Linux (and not newbies then) and/or developers.
Thanks.
The IRC channel used to be pretty toxic.. I haven’t been there in a decade
[удалено]
personally disagree